As a Nikon shooter myself, the stats on the Sony a7R III have my head turning. After watching Sony grow over the past few years and seeing how good their cameras are, I think it is safe to say that this new camera will not disappoint. Being that I mainly shoot photography, the “R” definitely calls my name and I think one of the biggest factors is the fact that this body can also shoot some pretty good video. These videos really have me thinking about what my next step could be when shopping for gear.
I currently own a Nikon D750. It is an amazing camera and I absolutely love it for photography. I mean hell, I even loved it for video when I had to use that feature on it a while back. For me, the only thing Nikon really lacks in right now is video, and even with all the upgrades to the D850, you still don't get logs or in-body stabilization. This plays a huge role in the work that I do and looking into the D850 and a7R III, I would have to think that the Sony is the better option for all-around use in the long run. Right now, I am using a Panasonic GH5 for video and I don't think I could love that camera any more either. With the way things are headed though, I think that having a full-frame camera that can do photo and video would be ideal.
It's funny because a few days ago, I was really considering jumping on the D850 until I took a little more time to think about it. Sony is obviously a bit pricey and there is a ton to think about when it comes to switching. From my standpoint as a photographer doing more and more video work, I think that moving to Sony could be very beneficial. As much as I love Nikon and all of the photos I was able to capture with their gear, I feel like my time has come. What are your thoughts on the new Sony a7R III? Do you think this camera is one of the first of its kind?
"The first of its kind?" What does that even mean?
I think he means "first full frame camera to be top at stills and more than decent in video"
To me, "first" should be reserved for a much more seminal camera.
Its the very first a7iii, there will never be another one. the a7iv will be the first of ITS kind etc...
In which case, every camera is the first of ITS kind and therefore it doesn't mean anything. :-)
As an event photographer 90% of my subjects are people. The eye auto focus function is brilliant and allows me to shoot at shallow apertures with confidence. I have only used the a7R III on one event and the hit rate was phenomenal in comparison to my Nikon D5. It is early days but an exciting camera to use.
I use an A7 II, which is over 3 years old. Even on my camera, the eye autofocus works way better than it has any right to.
Agreed the A7RII and A7II's eye focus is already very precise. Just a bit slow in low light and especially with quite fase moving subjects
All I can say is that switching is totally not a big deal in the end. When I switched from samsung to sony I got to sell my NX1 for more than it's cost (as the glass) so it wasn't too pricey. Also I got used to the controls within 2 shoots, and you need one or two hour to set it up to your liking with the help of a youtube video.
Perhaps not for you, but switching would be a pretty huge deal for someone like me, which is largely why I haven't jumped ship yet (not until I get to see Nikon's honest attempt at full-frame mirrorless, anyway). I buy all of my gear brand new so I'm taking a financial hit from the moment I open the box and for Sony, at least, the used market is not really robust enough to be able to trade in 1-for-1 for comparable lenses and accessories (Canon would be an easier switch financially in this sense).
Also, I'd be throwing out a good amount of muscle memory. Hell, the D810 to D850 isn't even a huge jump in terms of controls, but I still find my fingers occasionally reaching for the wrong buttons since they moved a few things around. Forget even thinking using the joystick (just not in my muscle memory to reach for it) and I've just flat out disabled the touchscreen since I'm so not used to using it on a camera that it's just become a nuisance. There's a lot of value in instantly knowing how much you have to turn a dial to stop down by 3 stops or speed up your shutter by 2 stops and while there will always be a re-training period with any new camera, the difference between two cameras in the same family is way smaller than two cameras from totally different companies.
If you're more adaptable than me and the financial hit isn't an issue, however, Sony without a doubt has some serious quality-of-life improvements to offer. I really wish I could get all that tech in a familiar form factor and control layout... :/ I guess we'll see in a year or so.
Oh, another article about "SONY MILC is the best thing and never seen on earth" ? Seriously ?
Misleading. Their concept of autofocus includes face detection. What is being compared is one face detection system versus another. Personally, I always have face detection on my D850 and D5 turned off.
I switched to Sony. I was on the fence as well switching from D810 to now Sony A7Riii. One of the main reasons for me is weight. I rather carry two Sony A7 series cameras than two Nikons (2 D810s). I would always carry that to photoshoots. It was killing me.
The Eye AF is amazingly accurate even in low light. I was quite surprised. Tried it out at my local camera store. They had the A7Riii and the A9. Decided on the A7Riii since i do not do any sports photography. The only kind of fast movement (dance photography) i shoot does not need 20fps.
With what lenses? If you're using primes, I can see an obvious weight savings as a percentage of the whole but for me, it wouldn't be that big a difference. When I'm out in the field, which is most of the time, I'm usually carrying larger, heavy zooms. I've never tried face detection with my D810. I just don't trust it.
its like comparing apples and potato's. sony is nice but there is a lot missing. ill wait for version 5. and there is a reason why Nikon is camera of the year 2017. there is no mention about skintones and postprocess hassle that you dont have on nikon or canon. not to mention the extra work to get video processed in premiere (skintones) i notice a lot of BH photo affiliate links in your article. its known that hte sony 7R3 isnt selling very well. makes you wonder if there is a reason behind this article, paid by BH photo? and why do you use other peoples videos ? not going to buy sony just yet. the weight argument, if a little bit of weight is an argument to switch you not really a man are you ? the weight discussion is a false argument.
I absolutely love how every single article that's posted talking about Sony, people assume it's a paid post. Yet, if I posted an article about either Canon or Nikon no one bats an eyelash.
Understand that Sony is the dark horse in the camera game and people will always be interested in content about it.
sony 7R3 isnt selling very well. its more a fix of the 7R2 then an evolution like the D850 is over the D810. second, your article is littered with affiliate links. combining the disappointing sales and affiliate links gives the impression there is a reason why this article might be written (BH stuck with stock ?). when you look at the video's on youtube you will notice that a lot of influencers are all of a sudden pushing Sony gear and then i mean the 7R3. the sony is not all rainbows and sunshine but it is a very good camera. owning the D750 i did look at the camera and seeing all the basic features its missing like a intervalometer (even my rebel and samsung S7 have that) i believe that sony isnt ready for me to switch to them. as i understand nikon is about to release a mirrorless version of the D850 using the same sensor (nikon rumors).
like i said, sony is great camera but its not all rainbows and sunshine and its not better then the D850. nikon has this over sony, sony has that over nikon. would love to have a mirrorless version of the D850 and a sony 7R3 with a 24-105 F4.
the sony/nikon war feels like the apple/samsung war.
end of day, a great photo is taken by the camera man, not by the camera, it takes right timing, settings, the photographers eye and being in the right place at the right time.
"sony 7R3 with a 24-105 F4..". You mean something like this maybe: https://www.sony.com/electronics/camera-lenses/sel24105g
Nikon hasn't figured out video yet, I wouldn't hold my breath for a mirrorless Nikon that would compete with the likes of Sony or Panasonic or Fuji any time soon. :)
Not trying to knock Nikon. As a ex-D810 shooter, I can say that if all I was shooting was landscapes or cityscapes, I may have picked the D850 over the A7R iii (and that's a big "may"). Its not that Sony beats the D850 in everything, but it surely beats it at most things.
i find it very difficult. i am looking at this set 7R3 and the 24-105 f4. i dissagree with beating nikon in most things. in video, hands down it does. in the rest, i dont think so. but who knows. i saw a metabone for nikon lenses and if i can generate some money i might buy both. i wont switch completely, couldnt effort it. lens options is still a thing. both sensors are amazing, but no intervalometer, no imagestacking, i need those and sony doesnt have it.
Each to their own. I used an external intervalometer when I owned a D810. Most people I know who have owned an A7R II don't use the internal intervalometer either. I use a Shutterboss II with the A7R III and it's not an extra gadget I have to carry, as I use it as my remote shutter release too. Though Focus Stacking is a cool feature, you don't have to have the function to do it, or to even do it well. You have to process the files in PS anyway, so what's a couple of extra steps on something you will use occasionally (unless you do Macro all the time). I would suggest that Pixel Shifting is a more crucial feature as you cannot do it with the D850, period. And it is one of those occasionally used features that could make a large print of a cityscape you took look really amazing. I struggled for about two months before I pulled the trigger, and am really happy with my decision. Having said that, it's like deciding between a Ferrari and a Lambo. You would have a good time whichever way you end up. :) Frankly, from what I have learnt, if I had to choose between "Sony + adapted lenses" or Nikon, I would choose Nikon. My decision was to sell all my old gear and buy GM glass with my A7R III. SONY G/GM lenses are awesome, and cover the gamut for most people.
i think these days the canon vs nikon has changed to sony vs nikon. both camera's have a very good sensor. for landscape i would pick the nikon i guess. focus stacking makes life a lot easier. large print. 8200 dpi / 300 dpi is not a huge wall sized pic. fine art print e.g. prints at higher dpi. right now im looking into photographing land or city scapes using multiple pics, bit like what Vast is doing. large very detailed prints ultra sharp. but like i said before . both amazing camera that both have their strong points but neither has everything to all shooters. funny enough, first three weeks of this year i earned more money on pics shot with my Samsung S7 then with my nikon. tells me its all about the pic and not about the gear. but men will be men wanting that latest greatest gadget. pondering, maybe i should buy both,...all this thinking is making my bank account hurt,.
Does thea7iii video suffer from moire or aliasing?